Under a DACA amnesty, American taxpayers would be left with a $26 billion bill. About one in five DACA illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while at least one in seven would go on Medicaid. Since DACA’s inception under Obama, more than 2,100 illegal aliens have been kicked off the program after it was revealed that they were either criminals or gang members. JOHN BINDER

Thursday, March 31, 2016

CAN'T AFFORD HEALTHCARE? - Become an ILLEGAL! This will help HIllaria Clinton suck in more bribes from BIG PHARMA!

"There are the billions of taxpayer dollars used to subsidize illegal
immigrants' health care and education. There's the revenue we lose out
on when illegal immigrants don't pay income taxes. And there's a less
recognized pot of billions — the billions of dollars of earnings that
illegal immigrants wire out of the United States with no tax or penalty."

IN COLLUSION WITH THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, THERE'S NEVER AN END TO MEXICO'S LOOTING.

Local Officials Using State Funds To Provide Healthcare To Illegal Aliens

Tue,Mar 29th 2016 @ 12:37 am EDT

A
new Wall Street Journal Survey showed that 20 out of the 25 counties in
the U.S. with the highest levels of illegal aliens are using state
funds to provide healthcare for local illegal aliens. Participants in
these programs, regardless of immigration status, receive healthcare
services such as doctor visits, shots, prescription drugs, lab tests and
surgeries for free or at an extremely reduced cost paid for by the
local taxpayers.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that around one-quarter of
the approximately 30 million uninsured people in the U.S. are illegal
aliens and federal policies have prohibited illegal aliens from using
the Affordable Care Act to obtain healthcare due to the high costs.

For all 20 counties that were part of the survey it cost them a total
of over $1 billion a year to provide nonemergency care for at least
750,000 illegal aliens. The majority of these bills were paid for from
the local funds of those communities.

Andreas Borgeas, a member of the board of supervisors in Fresno
County, CA, said that providing illegal aliens with healthcare has
“created an ongoing entitlement that’s going to be difficult to
sustain.”

Berkeley’s Center for Labor Research and Education estimates that
California will have around 1.5 million adult immigrants in 2019 and to
provide Medicaid alone to these who meet the program’s low-income
criteria would cost the state $400 million more a year.

This subject has been a huge part of the 2016 presidential debate
with Republican candidate’s Ted Cruz and Donald Trump saying they would
continue the federal policies of not allowing illegal aliens to receive
healthcare coverage while Democrat candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie
Sanders would like to offer illegal aliens healthcare coverage and
eventually citizenship. You can view their

HILLARY CLINTON SAYS MILLIONS MORE VOTING ILLEGAL SHOULD BE HANDED OBAMACARE!CLINTON'S PLATFORM IS SIMPLE: BUILD THE MEX WELFARE STATE ON AMERICA'S BACK TO BUY THEIR ILLEGAL VOTES.THEY ALREADY GET MILLIONS OF OUR JOBS AND BILLIONS IN WELFARE!HILLARY SAYS HAND MY PEOPLE (ILLEGALS) MORE!

NO ONE SERVES HIS PAYMASTERS ON WALL STREET MORE THAN BARACK OBAMA!

HE SMELLS THOSE SPEECH FEE BRIBES ALREADY!

AND HILLARY IS OBAMA'S CLONE!

Drug prices have also been a theme in the presidential campaign. The
Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, for example, released a campaign
advertisement earlier this month attacking the “predatory pricing” of
Valeant Pharmaceuticals. Like the congressional hearing, this is all for
show. Of all the presidential candidates, Clinton is the top recipient
of donations from the pharmaceutical and health products industry,
taking in $410,460 according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

US drug prices doubled since 2011

By
Brad Dixon
18 March 2016

According to a new report by
the pharmacy benefits manager Express Scripts, the average price of
brand-name drugs increased by 16.2 percent last year. Between 2011 and
2015, branded prescription drug prices have nearly doubled, rising 98.2
percent. Since 2008, the prices have increased by a whopping 164
percent.

Drug spending rose by 5.2 percent in 2015. This was about half the
increase seen in 2014, the year of the largest hike since 2003.

The report is based upon prescription use data for members with drug
coverage provided by Express Scripts plan sponsors. In assessing changes
in plan costs, the report distinguishes between the relative
contributions from changes in patient utilization (e.g. more patients
being prescribed the drug) and changes in the unit price of the drug
(e.g., price hikes).

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, most drug spending was on
traditional drugs (small-molecule, solid drugs) to treat conditions such
as heartburn, depression and diabetes. The recent trend has been a
shift to specialty drugs. Still, within traditional therapy categories
there were significant increases in spending on medications to treat
diabetes, heartburn and ulcers, and skin conditions.

Diabetes medications remain the most expensive of the traditional
drug categories. Drug spending in this category increased by 14 percent,
with the hike being equally influenced by increased utilization of the
drugs and rise in unit cost. Three diabetes treatments—Lantus, Januvia
and Humalog—were among the top five drugs in terms of spending across
all traditional therapy classes.

Although not discussed in the report, an investigation by Bloomberg News last year found evidence
of “shadow pricing” by drug manufacturers, where companies raise their
prices immediately after their competitors do so. The investigation
found that the prices of diabetes drugs Lantus and Lemivir had increased
in tandem 13 times since 2009, and evidence of similar shadow pricing
for the drugs Humalog and Novolog.

Heartburn and ulcer drugs saw a 35.6 percent increase in spending,
almost solely due to the rise in unit cost. Although 92.3 percent of the
medications filled in this category were generic, the price unit trend
was heavily influenced by the increase in prices of branded drugs such
as Nexium, Dexilant and Prevacid.

Treatments for skin conditions also saw a significant increase of
27.8 percent in spending, again due almost completely to rises in the
unit costs of the medications. The report notes that these increases
occurred for both generic and branded therapies, largely due to industry
consolidation through mergers and acquisitions leading to less
competition in the market. While 86.3 percent of the drugs filled were
generic, many of the generic versions saw sharp increases in unit cost,
including the two most widely used corticosteroids, clobetasol (96.2
percent) and triamcinolone (28 percent).

While the overall spending increase for traditional therapy classes
was nominal (0.6 percent), the primary factor for the increase in
spending came from specialty medications. Specialty medications require
special education and close patient monitoring, such as drugs to treat
cancer, multiple sclerosis or cystic fibrosis. Spending on specialty
drugs rose by 17.8 percent in 2015. The report found that 37.7 percent
of drug spending was for specialty drugs in 2015, and the figure is
expected to rise to 50 percent by 2018.

Spending in this category was topped by inflammatory conditions—such
as rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases and psoriasis—which
rose by 25 percent, driven by a 10.3 percent increase in utilization
and 14.7 percent rise in unit cost. The average cost per prescription in
2015 was $3,035.95. The medications Humira Pen and Enbrel, which
captured more than 66 percent of the market share for this class, saw
unit cost increases of more than 17 percent.

Spending on oncology therapies increased by 23.7 percent, due to both
increased use (9.3 percent) and increased unit cost (14.4 percent). New
cancer therapies average $8,000 per prescription and the average cancer
regimen is around $150,000 per patient. Between 2005 and 2015, the
anti-cancer drug Gleevec, manufactured exclusively by Novartis, has seen
its price more than triple, with an annual cost of $92,000. In 2015,
the year prior to the drug’s patent expiration, Novartis increased the
unit cost of the drug by 19.3 percent. This is a common practice for
companies facing patent expiration.
Drug spending on cystic fibrosis treatments rose by a significant
53.4 percent, largely based on increases in unit cost (40.9 percent vs.
13.3 percent from patient utilization). This rise was largely due to use
of the new oral combination therapy, Orkambi, which became available in
mid-2015. The drug costs more than $20,000 per month.

The report forecasts that between 2016 and 2018 spending will
increase annually by 7-8 percent for traditional drugs and around 17
percent for specialty drugs.

The prices of generic drugs have on average decreased, although there
are notable exceptions. Pharmaceutical companies like Horizon Pharma,
Turing Pharmaceuticals, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals have purchased
generic drugs and then significantly hiked their prices.

The report notes the emergence of “captive pharmacies” in 2015 as
another factor responsible for higher drug spending. Captive pharmacies
are owned or operated by pharmaceutical manufacturers and tend to
promote their manufacturer’s drugs, rather than generic or other
low-cost alternatives. The report gives as examples the arrangements
between Valeant Pharmaceuticals and Philidor Rx Services, and between
Horizon Pharma and Linden Care Pharmacy.

The Express Scripts data matches the findings released earlier this
year by the Truveris OneRx National Drug Index, which found that branded
drugs rose by 14.8 percent in 2015.

Despite the widespread media publicity of the notorious drug price
hikes by companies like Turing and Valeant, pharmaceutical companies
have continued to inflate prices in 2016, with Pfizer leading the way with an average price hike of 10.6 percent for 60 of its branded drugs.

Workers are rightly outraged at the skyrocketing price of drugs. A
Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted last year found that 74 percent
of respondents felt that the drug companies put profits before people.

The political establishment, however, has sought both to exploit this
anger for electoral support and to direct it into safe channels that do
not disrupt the status quo.

A congressional hearing held in January placed a spotlight on the price-gouging practices of HYPERLINK Valeant Pharmaceuticals and Turing Pharmaceuticals, whose dubious activities were highlighted in a pair of congressional memos.
The purpose of the hearing, however, was not probe the underlying
causes of the sharp rise in drug prices. Instead, legislators sought to
safeguard the profits of the pharmaceutical industry as a whole through a
verbal lambasting of the industry’s most notorious culprits.

Drug prices have also been a theme in the presidential campaign. The
Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, for example, released a campaign
advertisement earlier this month attacking the “predatory pricing” of
Valeant Pharmaceuticals. Like the congressional hearing, this is all for
show. Of all the presidential candidates, Clinton is the top recipient
of donations from the pharmaceutical and health products industry,
taking in $410,460 according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders, who has stated that he will support
Clinton if he loses the Democratic nomination, received $82,094 in
donations from the industry. Sanders has proposed a series of minor
reforms to address drug prices, such as the re-importation of drugs from
Canada, allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with drug manufacturers,
and decreasing the patent life of branded drugs.
None of the candidates, including the “democratic socialist” Sanders,
challenge the private ownership of the pharmaceutical industry in which
everything from research and development and clinical testing to drug
pricing and promotion are subordinated to the profit interests of
corporations.

OF
AMERICAN JOBS WITH STOLEN IDENTITIES. THEY ALSO DRIVE ILLEGALLY,
CONTRACT ILLEGALLY AND SEND BACK TENS OF BILLIONS IN DRUG PROFITS TO
NARCOMEX.THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAS LONG BEEN SABOTAGING STATES' ATTEMPT TO CURB LA RAZA FASCIST FROM VOTING.MEXICO KNOWS THAT THE 40 MILLION LOOTING MEXICANS DON'T HAVE TO BE "PERMANENT RESIDENTS" TO GO VOTE FOR MORE!HILLARY CLINTON HAS ALREADY PROMISED THE MEX OCCUPIERS 49 MORE MEXIFORNIAS!

March 21, 2016

Mexican government urging US immigrants to become citizens and vote

Mexican
consulates in the U.S. are hosting citizenship clinics across the
country, hoping to convince permanent residents from Mexico to become
U.S. citizens so they can vote against Donald Trump.The pious declaration from the Mexican government that they are not "interfering" in the U.S. election fails the smell test.Bloomberg:

Joel
Diaz doesn’t want to wait to see how it all turns out. The
Mexican-American, who has been a permanent resident of the U.S. for six
years, arrived at the Mexican consulate in Chicago on Saturday with his
wife and four adult sons to register all of them as U.S. citizens in
order to vote against Trump.

"We’re
very worried," Diaz, 47, an evangelical pastor, said. "If he wins there
will be a lot of damage against a lot of people here, and to us as
Hispanics, as Mexicans."

Laura
Espinosa, deputy consul in Mexico’s consulate in Las Vegas, said the
main goal of the program is citizenship, and while that includes the
right to vote, the government doesn’t press people to do so. "Those who
use this to vote, that’s up to each individual," said Espinosa, who
confirmed that most consulates have begun citizenship campaigns. "We
don’t have any opinion on that, because that would be totally
interfering in internal affairs of the country."

The
government in Mexico City is holding off on engaging the Trump campaign
directly until he becomes the nominee, said Francisco Guzman, chief of
staff to Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. Speaking with reporters
on March 1, Guzman said the government plans to communicate with the
campaigns of the nominees once they’re chosen and try to dispel what it
considers misinformation about Mexico and Mexicans.

The
public-relations offensive now under way includes using news outlets
and social media to highlight the strides Mexicans have made in
business, the arts and academia in the U.S., said Paulo Carreno, the
former spokesman of Citigroup Inc.’s Mexico unit who oversees the
country’s international branding strategy.

Promoting
Mexico in the U.S., from its scholars to artists, is meant "not to
influence an election, but a whole generation and those that follow,"
Carreno said in an e-mailed response to questions. "The strategy will be
an important anchor in our consular network in the country."

It
should be noted that the chances of the Mexican government succeeding
in getting enough of their people to become U.S. citizens so that they
can make a difference in the 2016 election are low. But over a period
of years, that could change – especially if the Republicans continue to
refuse to compete for the Hispanic vote. Immigration issues are not the
end-all and be-all for Hispanics in the U.S. They have the same
concerns as any American about the economy and the culture.

Not
even trying to persuade Hispanics that the GOP's agenda would be better
for them than the Democrats will continue to make any national election
and uphill climb for the Republican candidate.

John Bolton: Open Borders ‘Destroying’ The American ‘Experiment’

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton tells Breitbart News Daily host
Stephen K. Bannon that, in effect, unfettered illegal immigration is
“destroying this experiment” known as America and “the consequences will
come sooner than later and they will be negative in their entirety.”

Beginning the immigration discussion in Europe, said Bolton:

There’s a philosophy out there and it’s the kind of
conventional wisdom on the International Left that International
borders, you know, they’re just kind of there and really people should
be allowed to go anywhere they want. They don’t like to say that so
expressly publicly. And I guess I’m exaggerating for effect to an
extent, but the notion that a given nation – a Spain – can be filled
with, I know this is anachronistic, Spanish people, is something that
they reject. So, if you live in the Middle East and want to live in
Germany, why not?

When asked about America’s Southern border, said Bolton:

I think that after decades of being lectured by our
friends in Europe about out attitude toward illegal immigration, they’re
now seeing the chickens come home to roost. I think citizenship is a
critical concept in a democratic society and America has, over the
years, because of our melting pot phenomenon, our ability to integrate
people from all over the world – it’s our national motto E Pluribus Unum
– it has made us the greatest country in History. If you abandon that
and say that citizenship is for anybody that happens to be on our side
of the border, you’re destroying this experiment. And the consequences
will come sooner than later and they will be negative in their entirety.

Asked if the migrant issue in Europe is starting to become a national security issue for the United States, said Bolton:

Oh, I think it is. I think it’s already a national
security for Europe. I think you could possibly see the results of this
in the british referendum in June on whether they’re going to stay in
the European Union, or not. They’ve seen what happened in Paris in
November. Then back in January of 2015. They saw what happened in
Brussels just last week. They’ve seen people pushing to get on the
trains coming in the tunnel under the English Channel. And I think they
already have their own domestic difficulties in the UK and it’s going to
have an effect on that referendum. And I think it is on elections all
over Europe.

Study: Employment rate of illegal immigrant men far higher than for legal immigrants and natives

A new study
by George Borjas from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard University reveals what many have long been concerned about when
it comes to illegal immigration into the United States.According
to Borjas' paper, the "employment rate of undocumented men is 86.6%, as
compared to 73.9% for natives and 77.8% for legal immigrants," and this
gap has been widening since the mid-1990s.

The
study shows that about 10% of all persons in their early 30s are
undocumented. In addition, 23% of illegal immigrants live in California,
7% reside in New York, and 15% live in Texas.Borjas reached the following conclusions:

Even
after the regression exhaustively controls for... skill differences --
and adjusts for the possibility that economic conditions varied
dramatically over time for each of the narrowly defined skill groups, as
well as for the possibility that economic conditions varied
dramatically among the different geographic regions where the three
groups tend to settle -- it is still the case that the employment rate
of immigrants, and particularly that of undocumented immigrant men,
increased dramatically relative to that of native-born persons.

More
evidence that illegal immigrants are both taking jobs away from legal
Americans and undercutting their wage bargaining power.

US employment report: Payrolls rise, wages fall

By Barry Grey5 March 2016

President Barack Obama seized on
the February employment report, released Friday morning by the Labor
Department, to tout the supposed “success” of his economic policies and
paint a picture of a thriving US economy. The report, which showed a
larger-than-predicted growth in private nonfarm payrolls of 242,000
jobs, confirmed that the US economy was “the envy of the world,” Obama
told reporters at a White House appearance.

“The fact
of the matter is that the plans that we have put in place to grow the
economy have worked,” he boasted.” He derided “an alternative reality
out there from some of the political folks that America is down in the
dumps.” He countered, “America is pretty darn great right now.”

He
did not attempt to explain why the “alternative reality,” which his
labor secretary, Thomas Perez, attributed to “fear-mongers and
fact-deniers,” is believed by tens of millions of Americans, whose anger
over economic injustice is dramatically reflected in the current
election campaign.

One does not have to look too
closely at the Labor Department’s report, however, to get an idea of
what is fueling the social indignation of working people in the eighth
and final year of the Obama administration. Behind the top-line number
for new jobs and the quasi-fictional official unemployment rate of only
4.9 percent, ongoing trends with disastrous consequences for the working
class are evident. They account for two other important indices in the
report: a decline in average earnings from the previous month of 3
cents, or 0.1 percent, to $25.35, bringing the increase for the year
down to just 2.2 percent, and a fall in the average private-sector
workweek of 0.2 hours to 34.4 hours, a two-year low.

These
two figures arise from the fact that the vast bulk of new jobs created
in February were low-wage and a huge percentage were part-time. The
low-paying service sector—retail, bars and restaurants, health
care—accounted for 245,000 jobs. The reality of recession in basic
production was reflected in a 16,000 decline in manufacturing and the
loss of another 19,000 mining jobs, bringing to 171,000 the total
decline in mining since September 2014. The only better-paying
industrial sector that saw an increase was construction, which recorded a
gain of 19,000.

Another figure highlights the hollow
and socially regressive character of Obama’s so-called “recovery.” The
financial cable network CNBC pointed out that according to the Labor
Department’s household survey, which is the basis for the unemployment
rate figure (the figure on payroll growth is derived from a separate
survey of business establishments), full-time jobs increased in February
by only 65,000, while part-time positions increased by 489,000. This
means that a mere 11.7 percent of new jobs in February were full-time!

These
statistics point to the fact that the American ruling class, through
its instrument, the Obama administration, has utilized the financial
crash of 2008, for which it was responsible, to fundamentally reorganize
the US economy, transforming it into a low-wage system. The millions of
decent-paying jobs that were destroyed have been largely replaced by
poverty-wage, part-time and temporary jobs.

The median
household income has fallen sharply. Pensions and health benefits have
been gutted, schools closed by the thousands, teachers and other public
workers laid off by the millions. At the other end, the Federal Reserve
and the US Treasury have pumped trillions of dollars into the financial
markets, driving up the stock market and bringing the concentration of
wealth at the very top to unprecedented levels. This is what Obama lauds
as “success.”

Meanwhile, millions of Americans remain
mired in long-term unemployment. The number of long-term unemployed,
defined as without work for 27 weeks or more, was essentially unchanged
at 2.2 million in February. This number has not shifted significantly
since last June. The long-term jobless accounted last month for 27.7
percent of the unemployed, a far higher percentage than in any previous
period categorized as an economic recovery.

A broader
measure of unemployment that includes people working part-time but
wanting full-time work and those too discouraged to seek employment
registered 9.7 percent last month, nearly double the official jobless
rate. There are, in addition, millions of people who have dropped out of
the labor market and are not even counted in government employment
reports.

While the employment-to-population ratio edged
up to 59.8 percent and the labor force participation rate rose slightly
to 62.9 percent, both measures remain extraordinarily low by historical
standards.
The impact of soaring social inequality and falling
living standards for broad sections of the population is reflected in a
growing crisis in the retail sector. This week, sporting goods chain The
Sports Authority filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and
announced it was closing at least 140 of its 463 stores and laying off
3,400 of its 13,000 employees. This follows recent announcements by
Walmart, Sears/Kmart and Macy’s of hundreds of store closures and
thousands of layoffs.

Hillary
Clinton repeatedly claims that she is the champion of the little guy.
It has always been a risible claim, but if any of her supporters
(including at the Post) are actually paying attention to the scoundrel,
this latest gambit ought to disabuse them of the notion.